A majority of swing voters (54%) are less likely to vote for President Obama after learning that he voted against a law to give equal treatment and constitutional protections to babies born alive after a failed abortion (35% much less likely).

After learning of President’s Obama’s record of opposing equal treatment and constitutional rights for babies born alive after a failed abortion, women (53%), independents (46%) and pro-choicers (43%) said they would be less likely to vote for the President.

By a margin of 2-to-1 (49%-25%), likely swing voters in battleground states say they are less likely to vote for President Obama based on his inclusion of taxpayer funding of abortion in Obamacare.

Swing voters overwhelmingly reject (69%) the HHS mandate that forces faith-based institutions to violate their beliefs and provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs. Forty four percent of voters said they are much less likely to vote for the candidate who imposes such regulations.

The poll was conducted by the polling company inc./WomanTrend of likely voters in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin who were either undecided or are leaning toward Romney or Obama.

In other words, when Independents or leaners learn of Obama’s abortion record, they are repulsed. We must get the word out.

Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)

Violations will be deleted and you may be banned. Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.

Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.

Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls
to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They
reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.

@phillymiss: That’s my feeling with this election. Every other one I can remember, I’ve had a “feeling” about one candidate or the other that turned out to be right. Not the most sophisticated of metrics, I admit, but it’s worked for me. Until now, anyway. This time…I haven’t got the “this guy’s going to win” vibe from either one. I suppose we’ll all find out together.

I thought this post was about a poll showing that Obama’s extreme pro-abortion view is hurting him in some swing states. Apparently our trolls disagree, and think this poll means its time to comment with ridiculous nonsense.

I thought this post was about a poll showing that Obama’s extreme pro-abortion view is hurting him in some swing states. Apparently our trolls disagree, and think this poll means its time to comment with ridiculous nonsense.

John, the poll is ridiculous nonsense. Sorry if we were too subtle for you. It’s a silly push poll

Hal, so what you’re saying is that a poll about how Obama’s extremist pro-abortion views are unpopular in swing states is not relevant on a pro-life website. The poll doesn’t claim that Romney is winning in those states, or even that a significant number of people in those states are being switched to Romney due to abortion. All it says is that Obama’s pro-abortion extremism is unpopular. It doesn’t warrant the arbitrary ridicule that you and Ex-GOP seem to feel obligated to bring to it. Nobody said that this poll proves that Romney is going to win the election because of the candidates’ abortion views.

As for this post, it asks us to get the word out about Obama’s pro-abortion extremism. But I suppose you and the fake pro-lifer Ex-GOP think that supporting abortion up to and in some cases after birth is fantastically wonderful, and it should all be funded by taxpayer money because abortion is awesome. In that case, by all means spread the gospel of the great pro-abortion Obama.

If you believe this poll, I must ask – how massively incredibly unpopular is Romney?

Take a look at some very recent polls:
– Fox News – Ohio – Obama up by 7
– Fox News – Virginia – Obama up by 7
– We Ask America – Wisconsin – Obama up by 11.5
– Washington Post – Ohio -Obama up by 8
– New York Times/Quin. – Florida – Obama up by 9

So what I’m understanding then from this posting is that this issue is pushing a few percentage points back to Romney – so if you factor out this issue, and just go off of things like the economy, foreign policy, and other voting issues – Obama would be up, what, 15% in these states? Or even if it is just a 2 point swing to Romney based on this issue- that Obama is up double digits in Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, Virginia (I didn’t even post Nevada, Iowa, Michigan, and Penn).

Is that seriously what the bottom line is – that the economic argument of the right has gotten so weak that without this issue helping Romney, that Obama would have the election completely wrapped up by now?

Ex-GOP are you trying to make me nuts? I know you like to troll but come ON. The poll doesn’t discuss who is winning in the swing states or what issues are motivating them. All it says is that Obama’s pro-abortion extremism is unpopular among swing voters who are aware of it in some swing states! That’s IT! NOBODY said that this poll proved Romney was winning or was ahead.

But since you feel obligated to discuss overall poll numbers on voting rather than just THIS poll which dealt with abortion specifically, I can tell you exactly why Obama is ahead in the polls. Obama is ahead because:

-He has a letter “D” after his name so anyone who is a Democrat is voting for him, regardless of how terrible he has been. About 40% of Democrats claim to be pro-life but they’ll proudly vote for Obama in November. These people are a disgrace.

-He is supported by minorities who have been told and convinced by liberals that Republicans want to kill them. Ironically it’s the liberals who have been killing the minorities at abortion clinics

-He is a “cool guy” and in our current society style is favored very, very, VERY highly above substance.

-He enjoys vast support from men and women of ill will like you and Hal. You know, people who believe that Catholics shouldn’t have religious freedom and that unborn babies should be denied any kind of due process rights

-The MSM overwhelmingly supports him, because they are liberal and so is he

Basically our only hope on Election Day is that the racist, the ignorant, and the evil people stay home while the informed voters go to the polls. Otherwise we’ll be stuck with this idiot for another four years and it will take decades to undo the damage he will continue to do to the Constitution.

On June 17, Obama held a slight edge over Mitt Romney among Catholics (49 percent to 47 percent), according to the Pew Research Center. Since then, Obama has surged ahead, and now leads 54 percent to 39 percent, according to a Pew poll conducted Sept. 1

Polls, schmolls. They’re a fine indication if you have confidence in the pollsters. Almost all of them are dishonest real attempts of voter suppression, unlike the fake cries against requiring voter I.D.

However, I am following Rasmussen. Yes, he leans Republican, but in the last two presidential elections he has been accurate. The New York Times and Washington Post polls which have Obama so far ahead don’t get very high marks.http://electoralmap.net/2012/2008_election.php

Rasmussen has consistently showed the presidential race to be a dead heat:

Hal, there are plenty of politicians who managed to fool a majority of the people into voting for them who I would most certainly not call “winners”. As for Catholics, only about half of the people who call themselves Catholic actually are, so it’s no big surprise that a majority of “Catholics” would support a president who makes war on the Catholic Church. Didn’t you guys find some despicable apostate who calls herself a nun to speak at the DNC?

Hans, I don’t know what’s going to happen, though at this point it looks like Obama is going to get back in. But you’re right — here in this very blue city I don’t see the enthusiasm I did for Obama in 2008. People were so energized and excited back then. I do see Obama supporters registering people to vote, but nothing on the scale of 2008.

Catholics must wonder when Cardinal Dolan wants to “break bread” with Obama. Is this what the Church does with those at war with it? A very mixed message is sent to Catholics.

Also, liberals, are liberals, are liberals so don’t be surprised about the Catholics. Jews will continue to support Obama despite his treatment of Netanyahu. I mean, certainly David Letterman and Beyonce take precedence over our most important ally in the middle east. It is more important to coffeeclutch with those cackling hens on The View than to meet with world leaders. Leave that trivial stuff to the Secretary of State. Even CNN pointed out how silly the president looked.

Mary, I was really sickened by Obama attending the fundraiser hosted by Jay Z. He is a former drug dealer whose crap music degrades women and reinforces negative stereotypes about black people. People talk about how the Republican party is for the rich, but Obama attends fundraisers hosted by Vogue editor Anna Wintour, plays basketball with George Clooney, and so on. Last time I checked these people weren’t exactly paupers.

– Rasmussen was the least accurate polling firm in the 2010 election cycle (according to 538.com). They were an average polling firm in 2008 (amongst all polls). Very relevant post today on their site looking at Rasmussen – so if you really want to understand polls, it is a good read. Hans though says it is the best poll – he’s actually completely wrong (using statistics as of late) – again, they were the WORST available poll in the last election cycle (they measure polling compared to final voting stats).

– Romney could certainly be right in it. If you see 10 polls though with solid methodology, and one of them doesn’t look like the rest, you have to take that into consideration. Somebody did say correctly though, there is only one poll that counts – the vote. I agree 100%. I would then scold the authors of this site for selectively posting a poll or two a week.

– Today was the worst day for Romney in the whole election cycle – when it comes to polls. Borderline double digit leads in Florida, Ohio, and Penn, and mid single digits in Iowa and Colorado. Romney will lose Pennsylvania – they’ve already polls advertising there (almost entirely). If he loses Ohio, he has to win Florida, Colorado, and Iowa (plus Wisconsin, Nevada, and a few other toss-up states).

– The GOP has made some ground up in the senate predictions though – right now, the prediction is the Dems will be around 51 or 52 seats.

Everything can change though – things move, bounces happen – it isn’t over until election night. It is clear though that Romney has to do something differently than he has.

Incumbents always have a leg up. But $4 gas, a GDP that can’t wobble much higher than 1% years after the recession supposedly ended, is not fuel for a reelection.

Obama can’t break 50% in many more states than the admittedly gargantuan N.Y. and California. A 7% undecided block will almost certainly look around and break off and add 5 or 6% for the challenger.

I sure like how Michael Vick performed at first with the Eagles. But another few weeks of mediocrity and yes, I say switch horses midstream. Shetland ponies are purty, but this is a job for a workhorse. And Obama, you’ve been found wanting.

Who knows for sure what will happen. Obama has probably hit his peak in a lot of places – I don’t see him winning Florida, Penn, and Ohio all by double digits, which is around the lead he has.

Romney is definitely in the corner right now – he’s got to pull a rabbit out of the hat.

Again, I can’t predict for sure – nobody can predict for sure. Right now though, it looks like 2004 all over again – massively vulnerable President, but the challenging party picks a flip-flopping elitist pretty boy from an east coast state that doesn’t connect with voters. Mitt Romney is John Kerry (politically speaking). While Obama certainly is vulnerable, Romney just doesn’t connect – he hasn’t so far, and it is hard to think he’s going to suddenly start to connect with voters.

If things don’t change, in about two weeks, it might be time to give up the white house and try to keep a 50/50 split in the senate.

But again, who knows – things happen, and when they do, they don’t affect one state – they affect them all – so if Romney can find something to shift a bunch of states 4-6 points, he’s back in the game.

I hear you. You would think our president would have more pressing concerns, like meeting with world leaders and dealing with a mideast crisis.

Its hard to imagine that a woman of such beauty and class as Beyonce would settle for, what is in the opinion of many people, a thug. Hopefully having a wife and daughter might make him think twice about denigrating women in his “music”, or find it disturbing when other singers do.

Beyonce clinched it with me by her actions after Taylor Swift was humiliated on stage by Kanye West, who made a colossol you know what of himself. She displayed a class and grace that will always influence my opinion of her.

Uh, why is this a “push poll”? Because it doesn’t use the euphemism “reproductive something or other” in place of “abortion”? Nonetheless, your big whoop assertions are only valid if they assume that voters actually are informed about Obama’s positions on abortion . . . most voters aren’t. That’s the point of the poll and the article.

Why should Obama meet with Israeli leaders? They are an ally only because of fictitious Bible prophecy. Let them fend for themselves. Israel is a terrorist state. We should give Israelis asylum in the U.S. and let Iran blow up the country.

Its hard to imagine that a woman of such beauty and class as Beyonce would settle for, what is in the opinion of many people, a thug

I don’t know how classy she is. I remember a commercial with her writhing around the floor and holding some chain beneath her teeth, like a dog. And she used to be half-naked in her videos. There’s nothing wrong with a woman expressing her sexuality, but there’s a fine line between being sexy and trashy (Madonna, are you listening)?

Hans, they need to bench Michael Pick and put Fote in! He has the size and the arm!

Mary – that simply isn’t true concerning Rasmussen – this missed the final voting stats by an average of 5.8% a contest in 2010. 13 of their predictions were off my more than 10 points – and one prediction broke the record for the farthest off a poll has been (in the pollster rankings) – they missed the final Hawaii Senate race numbers by 40 points.

Gallup and the polls sponsored by news organizations didn’t do so well. However, I just don’t buy that idea that there is some vast left-wing conspiracy to skew the polls. I do think Obama is ahead. but I am not sure how much. If InTrade is correct, however, it could be a landslide.

Yes, Rasmussen does lean right. But Silver is an Obama supporter, which no one seems to point out when talking about his polls:

Silver described his own partisan orientation as follows in the FAQ on his website: “My state [Illinois] has non-partisan registration, so I am not registered as anything. I vote for Democratic candidates the majority of the time (though by no means always). This year, I have been a supporter of Barack Obama”.[36] With respect to the impartiality of his electoral projections, Silver stated, “Are [my] results biased toward [my] preferred candidates? I hope not, but that is for you to decide. I have tried to disclose as much about my methodology as possible (from Wikipedia)

I love stats. I really do. I’m a baseball fan and check fangraphs and baseball prospectus daily playoff odds quite frequently. I’ve just always liked the statistics of public opinion as well.

One of the things I find interesting is, there are no “wrong” polls – it comes down to methodology. I could do a poll on this site, for instance, and Romney would win by 40 or so points. So when people say they simply discount some polls, I think that is a weak/ignorant argument – unless a person thinks they are lying about the results, what they should really do is look at the methodology and back up why they see issues.

I like stats – I like facts – they just give a lot more (on some subjects) than a gut feeling. I’ll admit, I’m a bit of a junkie when it comes to things like polls and predictive measures. Not like Nate Silver junkie…but I like reading about it.

“Oh, these polls are all garbage – none of them are worth reading…but now, I’m going to pick one cherry picked poll to support my opinion and ignore everything else and simply dismiss it because I want to”.

Two arguments I see on sites that drive me crazy (because of the illogical nature of them).

1) I dismiss all opinions of famous people because we shouldn’t care what they say – unless I agree with them, and then I think they are awesome.
2) I have 20 polls available, but I’ll just look at one to make my point – but if anybody states anything else with statistical backing, well, I’ll just dismiss it because it doesn’t support my viewpoint.

On the last point – quite simply, Romney can still win. He just wouldn’t win if the election were held today. It wouldn’t be close – unless there’s about 10% of the population that has gotten rid of phones, and they are ALL right wingers.

It’s a good read if you really want to understand more on Rasmussen and some of the methodology – they were certainly solid, and he gives them credit, for 2004 and 2006. They digressed to average (amongst all rankings – maybe he just ranks more than the Fordham guys) in 2008, and they were terrible in 2010.

Nate Silver has been in the business of poll crunching for years.

I think if you look at everything right now, from Rasmussen to the tons of other polls, including intrade, which has been pretty good as well (as a non-polling predictive site) – Romney is in real trouble.

It is interesting as well to see him now, essentially say that he expects to lose the first debate, and that it would be a huge shock if he won in Pennsylvania (which makes me wonder why he’s spending time there when he HAS TO win Ohio).

Phillymiss – the thing about Silver to know though – he doesn’t do polling. He takes the results of polls and combines them together in larger statistical methods, and he’s pretty darn accurate with it. I’d be concerned if he were polling people, but he’s not.

The same author (from Fordham) came out with a final report later – this from Wikipedia. I guess his final numbers for 2008 has Rasmussen as the 9th most accurate – so that might be where the average came from:

According to Politico, “Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome.”[37] In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, “Rasmussen’s final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama’s final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there.”[38] An initial Nov.5, 2008 Fordham University analysis ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls, assuming a 6.15% margin of victory by Obama. Rasmussen Reports and Pew Research Center tied as the most accurate.[39] Obama’s actual margin was 7.2%, and a complete analysis published in 2009 by the same author, Costas Panagopoulos, revealed Rasmussen to be tied for 9th most accurate. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread.

SBA could have also included Obama’s fundraising and support of Partial Birth Abortion in the ad. To most people; support of delivering a live baby to the shoulders and puncturing the baby’s skull is extreme and beyond the pale. And that is who Obama is.

Breitbart was pretty selective. While the Fordham looked at about 20 polls, Breitbart looked at less, and used some weird 75/25 ranking system.

Rasmussen – I said earlier they did great in 2004. Since then, I think they’ve had issues accounting for cell phone usage, or party affiliation. They’ve had quite a slant over the last few years and aren’t respected as highly as they once were (outside of people looking for biased polls).

Again, believe any poll you want. For me, if I’m looking at a state like Wisconsin, and since the 17th of September, I see Obama up by 5, 6, 7, 11.5, and then Rasmussen has Obama up by 3 – I tend to up the Rasmussen, take a few off the high outlier, and figure about a 6 or 7 point lead. If you want to take the Rasmussen 3 and completely throw out the 4 other polls (plus a Marquette the day before the Rasmussen that had Obama up by 14) – if you want to throw everything else out, that is your call.

What I mean is, I don’t care if somebody was “first” to predict something that was going to happen months before. A lot of places predict far out, and put a wide ranges of seats – based on the fact that we had a midterm election and a bad economy in 2010, it wasn’t a bold prediction.

This conversation has been about polling accuracy.

Electoral vote projections are picking up steam as well.

Election Projection has Obama winning 347-191, the Senate staying Dem, and the house staying GOP.

538 has Obama at 317-220 (in the “now-cast”, Obama is up 338-200, with a projection that some states will tighten up and flip). Senate projection is 51.7 to 48.3. No house projection.

Electoral-vote.com has Obama up 347-191, with the senate 49-48 Dems with a few current ties.

Real Clear Politics has Obama safe with 265, Romney safe with 191. That means of the 82 toss up, Obama just needs one state (or New Hampshire plus one out of Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida).

Most polling places were very close on 2008 – it was concluded that it was a pretty accurate election. Again, if you look further up on Phillymiss and my conversation, one breakdown by Furnham (the final release) had them middle of the pack. 2010, Rasmussen wasn’t nearly as close.

On the Marquette – I agree that their sample was off – I stated that I would knock it down closer. They were pretty tight on with the Walker recall – not sure why they put in such a shift in that poll. 538.com weights that specific poll lower than others around it.

Let me just ask it Mary – if the election were held today, who do you think would win?

Specifically, who do you think would win the various states:
– Ohio
– Pennsylvania
– Florida
– North Carolina
– Iowa
– Virginia

Rasmussen was right on the money for two elections, so either the man polls accurately or he’s a prophet. Also, these were elections where two different parties won. The man wasn’t showing favoritism. He also was one of the earliest predictors of the Republican landslide or 2010. A landslide that did come to pass.

You’re right, using the proper Dem sample MU got it right on the money for Walker. I don’t think the number of Democrat voters in Wisconsin has doubled since June.

Well in Ohio they have to bus around SEIU paid “protestors” to protest Romney appearances.

Other than this Rasmussen has shown these states to be a dead heat, as well as a few other polls, so being I am not a prophet, I cannot honesty say.

Given this mess in the middle east, the murder of our ambassador and 3 other Americans, and a president who is lying and would rather coffeeklutch with those hens on the view than meet with world leaders, especially at such a critical time, anything can happen. If you really think a video caused this EGV, then I have some ocean front property in Montana to sell you.

In the 11 states that are categorized as swing states Romney and Obama are statistically tied among Independent voters. If you take ‘leaners’ into account then Romney leads Obama 47% to 46%. This race is going to be determined by the same thing that determined the results in 2008 and in 2010. Turnout. And Obama has lost his shine. As of now I would say that you are more likely to see another Tea Party wave like 2010 then another Obamawave like 2008. But the debates could make the difference.

Well Mary, the beautiful thing about this country is you have the right to believe whatever you want to believe. If you want to solely bank on Rasmussen and ignore everything else, that is your choice. Heck, if you want to flip a coin daily, who am I to argue.

LOL. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? I said that being that I am not a prophet, I can’t honestly say. There is too much yet that could be a gamechanger, like the mideast situation and the debates.

+2 means the race is a dead heat, like it has consistently been with minor fluctuations one way or the other. 4 years ago at this time Obama was 50 to McCain’s 45 in Rasmussen and Obama remained 50-52% until the election.

Gallup predicted an 11 point margin of victory for Obama, he won buy 7. Rasmussen was on the spot. He predicted a 6 point victory, Obama won by 7.

Like I said EGV, it remains a tossup and being that I am no prophet, I have no opinion who will win. Romney is lowering expectations? Do your research, both campaigns are.

The president is the president and still has responsibilities, like getting daily intelligence briefings and meeting world leaders. I would say this takes precedence over Beyonce and Jay Z as well as the ladies on The View.

Perhaps you’ll join me in calling for campaign finance reform – it is a shame that the race has become an endless parade of fundraisers so that both campaigns can run smear tactic commercials all day long. Needs to be dialed back and less about the money so that both candidates can perform their current jobs, and when campaigning, spend time with the people.

0 likes

Who Is Jill Stanek?

Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.

At Carafem, staff members plan to greet clients with warm teas, comfortable robes and a matter-of-fact attitude.

“We don’t want to talk in hushed tones,” said Carafem president Christopher Purdy. “We use the A-word.”…

Because Carafem will offer only the abortion pill, not vacuum aspiration or other surgical procedures, prospective clients must be no more than 10 weeks pregnant….

After receiving counseling and some basic tests, Carafem clients will take an initial pill at the clinic. Purdy’s team expects to get them in and out quickly, within about 60 minutes. They will be sent home with a second set of pills to take the next day. The second dose induces the abortion, which resembles a miscarriage, typically within six hours.

By offering only pharmaceutical abortions, Purdy says, he can avoid purchasing expensive surgical equipment and keep prices low for clients. The average pharmaceutical abortion cost about $500 in the United States in 2011, Guttmacher figures show; Purdy plans to charge around $400.

Another striking aspect of the project is the design: The clinic will have wood floors and a natural wood tone on the walls that recalls high-end salons such as Aveda. Appointments, offered evenings and weekends, can be booked online or via a 24-hour hotline.

“It was important for us to try to present an upgraded, almost spa-like feel,” said Melissa S. Grant, vice president of health services for the clinic.

If the project is successful, Purdy says, he hopes to expand his model to other states.